Why Turkey doesn't recognize.

[cosmos]

Hi there.

I want to begin with these questions: Why do Turkey has to recognize the genocide or massacre? Has Turkey not got right of not recognizing it if it will cause some troubles?


We understand the forcing actions. In fact, although some people in this forum want it to be recognized because of their humanist beliefs, we know that some tricks is being planned for Turkey. Armenian genocide is a part of those aims that is being used by some people but not everyone.

It is easy to understand why 90th remembrance of 1915 was more spreaded. If Turkey join the EU it will be easier to take some advantages on it. I must add that the EU's aims are: to use Turks as a cheap-worker, to use the Turkish Army in order to interfere Middle-East. Preventing the productions even agriculture, to make the country their market so they will get back money which they paid for aid. These actions will be easier when the Turkey has been seperated. Armenian genocide is a part of it. It is not only a innocent demand.

Additionally, in the south soils of Turkey there are Arabic countries and in the East, Iran which have remained in the Middle-Age. They was trying to export to Turkey their Islamic system to make the country be ruled according to religious law untill short time ago. They can try it again. Therefore, those countries and Greeece supported Turkey's enemies and they accepted the idea of: 'Turkey's enemies are our friend.' But Greece and other Europian countries must know that Turkey is a wall those to Islamic countries. (You’ll say isn’t Turkey a islamic? Yes, Turkey hasn’t been ruled according to religious laws). Causing the Turkey to be weakened can bring about more problems in the Middle-East and Europe.

These are not paranoias. We see the Yugoslavia’s present position. Once upon a time there were people who lived in accordance, then they killed each other and have hatred now. Wondering that what caused it?

[Tongue]

Turkey doesn't recognize the genocide out of the fear of having to compensate for the past. The end.

[cosmos]

I wish it was only compensation. Some people may think it purely 'payment enough'. However many others dont think so. We must be prepared for every probability.

In classical words, Armenian genocide is a glue that putting them together. An advantage but the realities are standing in their nest. We hardly reach them because they are secret but not unreachable. For now, unreachable is to contact for both sides. Both sides live in their castle and dont listen each other.

Armenians and Turks who have lived together for centuries but as much as that they are far away from each others. This may be an example for dialectic of the cosmos. According to Armenians, uneducated, barbaric Turks massacred our ancestors. Has there been any nation on the World realy barbaric? Or which nation didnt be barbaric? Which nation didnt fight and kill. Did the Turks kill more than the others? Think of the history.

I believe in that every problem between nations can be solved with knowing and trying to understand each other. In your castle there are you and your own ideas, beliefs etc. When I opened my ears to Armenian citizens I think I have understood them. We have been making mistakes and the other side too.

[Hovik]

I wish it was only compensation. Some people may think it purely 'payment enough'. However many others dont think so. We must be prepared for every probability.

Not quite sure that what I understand you are saying is what you meant so - no comment.

In classical words, Armenian genocide is a glue that putting them together. An advantage but the realities are standing in their nest. We hardly reach them because they are secret but not unreachable. For now, unreachable is to contact for both sides. Both sides live in their castle and dont listen each other.

Armenian Genocide is a glue holding us together? Are we falling apart? If the genocide took place only 90 years ago, what "glue" held together our culture and our nation for the last 2,600+ years? Has not our Christianity (the oldest declared by any state in the world) held us together since 301 AD? Has not our language and our unique alphabet (405AD) not kept us from assimilation and "glued" us together? Is it only a 90-year-old genocide "gluing" us together in a sea of history cosmos?

We don't need a horrible genocide to "glue" us together! We have plenty of positive aspects of our nation to take care of the "gluing". We love each other; we are a proud and very old civilization that would prefer to not have genocide in our history. The fact is that we DO, and we must fight for justice. Is the Genocide our "glue"? Absolutely not. Many things have kept our nation strong throughout the centuries. Sure the Genocide was another reminder to us that the only people in the world that can ensure the safety and well being of Armenians are Armenians themselves. Unlike Jews we don't have a rich and ignorant uncle...

Both sides live in their castles and don't listen to each other? First of all - Turks not only live in their castles, they kicked Armenians out of their castle also. So, lets get this straight, Turks live in both the Turkish and Armenian castle, and the Armenians (or what is left of them) live in the tent on the other side of the castles moat, which the Turk has established as a blockade to try to shut the Armenian up. Listen this, Listen that. Forget Turks and Armenians, go and "LISTEN" to what the eyewitnesses (non-turk, non-Armenian) had to say about what happened in the Ottoman Empire during the Genocide. Why don't you try arguing against their eyewitness accounts? Why don't you try explaining why they would lie? What they would gain from such a thing?

Armenians and Turks who have lived together for centuries but as much as that they are far away from each others. This may be an example for dialectic of the cosmos. According to Armenians, uneducated, barbaric Turks massacred our ancestors. Has there been any nation on the World realy barbaric? Or which nation didnt be barbaric? Which nation didnt fight and kill. Did the Turks kill more than the others? Think of the history.

Read your national history and tell anyone here how it was NOT barbaric. Many nations have barbaric occurrences in their collective history, but only a nation with repeated and extreme cases of barbarity throughout centuries of time could be considered a barbaric nation. Throughout the centuries, countless non-turkish women have been kidnapped and raped, and kept in your harems. Because of this, your blood has been thinned out if you will, and the barbarity has decreased. The ignorance and stubbornness on the other hand has not changed...

Again, read your history. Read eyewitness accounts of the conflicts between turks and non-turks and you will find disgusting, heinous atrocities that have been committed consistently for centuries. Who but turks could force Christian women to sharpen sticks, tie them into a cross shape and impale them through the womb to kill their unborn babies and themselves later die while turkish women and children looked on with delight? Who but turks could line up little children and shoot them in the back of the head in a line to see how many could be killed with a single bullet? Who but Turks? No, this isn't barbaric, this is just the beginning, go back in history to your Tamerlane and read about what a peaceful and laid back guy he was...

Back to barbarity: Denial of the sufferings of Armenians, including the Hamidian Massacres and culminating in the Armenian Genocide is the most brutal form of barbarity. This continuance of turkish barbarity is at an all time high!, with much of the nation taking part in it. The final phase of Genocide is the denial of the event all together and is known as a second Genocide (an attempt to eliminate memory and/or credibility of the survivors). Hence the barbarity of the turkish nation continues, and will not cease until turkey comes to face her bloody past.

I believe in that every problem between nations can be solved with knowing and trying to understand each other. In your castle there are you and your own ideas, beliefs etc. When I opened my ears to Armenian citizens I think I have understood them. We have been making mistakes and the other side too.

I believe your denial insecurity over the Armenian Genocide can be solved ONLY by you looking inwards and evaluating what role Ottomans played in the event without the "but"s. Only you can face your past. We can continue to agitate for you to face this past, but ONLY your nation can decide to do it or not.

We have already been through the whole "castle" thing... so no-comment... on it and the rest...

[Hovik]

Cosmos, In 1933, Polish Jewish scholar and attorney, Rafael Lemkin at the International Conference for Unification of Criminal Law in Madrid proposed two international offenses: (1) the “crime of barbarity” consisting of the extermination of racial, religious or social “collectivities;” and (2) the “crime of vandalism,” entailing the destruction of the cultural and artistic works of these groups.

I suppose based on that definition and the fact of the Armenian genocide one could assert that there have been quite a few barbarians (and vandals) in your recent history as well...

[cosmos]

Hovik,
When I said genocide is a glue for Armenians I didnt mean it is a only thing which have put them together. Of course, their culturel features are the first. You shouldn't have drawn a conclusion like this.

Okey, Turkish kicked Armenians out of the castle, I already accept it. But I said it for today and I meant Armenia and Turkey for the time being. There are Armenians who live in the castle with Turks. In the past, many Armenians lived together with them. Look at the Ottoman history many Armenians were in high positions especially Governors (Vali). I obviously say that the Ottoman Empire was certainly ruled by non-Turks since the second Sultan. No Sultan married a Turkish woman since the first one. No Turks was taken to the Palace even as dustman. Many Turks will say that they were certainly Turks because they learn the history from the school books. Therefore I can easily say that the deportation of Armenians was decided by non-Turks. You can find an Armenian among them maybe. If you dont believe me you are free to search it.

I know the Turkish history well and when I say you that more and more Turks were killed than Armenians probably you don't believe me again. I want to tell an example from my ancestors. My grandmother had told her history that had transferred generations to generations. She had said me 'my ancestors from Whiteships' (The State of Whiteship between the years of 1340-1514 their soils contained Armenia as well). Our state was collapsed by Ottomans in the time of Uzun Hasan (Tall Hasan). And then they had been deported to Salonica (a city of Greece) to fight against Christians. So many pure Turks were deported to different places. So Turks that you mention about are not barbaric as you have learned. It was the barbaric system of Rome culture that Ottomans inherited from Byzantium Empire (east Rome). When I said every nation are barbaric or not, I meant that Turks have not a special barbaric gene than the others have. I suppose you don't think it so, because it was believed by Nazis for many nations. And we can't think that Turks were thinking everyday 'I wonder of whom we should kill today.'.

So you must learn to seperate of Ottoman system and Turks. And I want to add that Christians were well-treated by Ottomans, at least better than Turks. You must learn to seperate Turks and Mongols that Turkish faschist ideology say that Tamerlane or Genghiz Kaan was Turk. I think you learn the Turkish history from them because even in Turkish school boks they are told as Mongols. This is a big mistake no historians believe it but faschists.

As for Harem system. Harem system was transferred together Islam. You know Turks were nomadic before and their riligion was Shamanism or The riligion of Sky. After joining Islam or islamized by Arabs by force, every Sultan had a harem which included many woman chosen from different places. It is a tradition of Islamic cultures for Sultans only. You may like it or not. You can criticize it. But we can not insult cultures for their traditions. This is not true. We can criticize them only. From your point of view it can be considered as a rape. But women in Harems were very eager to be chosen by Sultan. Because he was a Sultan. In their tradition it was accepted very normal. In your culture it may not be acceptable.

I offer you that if you will write so many things about Armenian genocide. You must learn the Turkish history from impartial sources. When I read a thing about Turks as related to Armenians it contains many insults to Turks.

Deportation was a part of Ottoman’s system. It was applied to many nations not Armenians only. In this kind of systems the state has all of rights, the state is over all of the things except God. The Sultan is considered as God’s representative on Earth. He and his congregation have all the rights that are over the all citizens. There, no human rights are valid.

Be good

[Tongue]

when I say you that more and more Turks were killed than Armenians probably you don't believe me again.

Why is it so hard for you people to understand the difference between the Armenian genocide and the Turks that died during WWI? This is one of the tactics used by your country to deny the genocide.

And I want to add that Christians were well-treated by Ottomans, at least better than Turks.

Are you sure you know your history?

[Hovik]

My lack of Turkish/Ottoman History in detail...

My knowledge of Turkish/Ottoman History has been questioned quite a bit by Turks in this forum. So, I offer you, Cosmos, and the others, the works I have read to date in chronological order. I hope these texts are impartial enough for you to accept them... Please refrain in the future from questioning my education in Turkish/Ottoman history unless you have read the following list and still have a wild reason to believe I know nothing... Now, if you don't mind, I will resume my justified posts with regard to the Armenian Genocide - Thank you very much....

YOU be good...

I offer you that if you will write so many things about Armenian genocide. You must learn the Turkish history from impartial sources. When I read a thing about Turks as related to Armenians it contains many insults of Turks.

Daniel Goffman. The Ottoman Empire and Early Modern Europe. Cambridge Univ. Press, 2002.

Donald Quataert. The Ottoman Empire, 1700-1922, Cambridge Univ Press, 2000.

Colin Imber. The Ottoman Empire, 1300-1650: The Structure of Power, Palgrave Macmillan, 2002.

Leslie Peirce. The Imperial Harem. Oxford Univ Press, 1993.

Peter Golden , "The World of the Steppes" from his An Introduction to the History of the Turkic Peoples: Ethnogenesis and State-Formation in Medieval and Early Modern Eurasia and the Middle East. Study guide for Golden .

J. J. Saunders , "The Turkish Eruption" from his History of Medieval Islam. Study guide for Saunders .

Robert Marshall , Selections, from his Storm from the East: From Genghis Khan to Khubilai Khan, Univ of California Press, 1993.

Hulegu's Campaign: a map of this Mongol campaign through the Middle East. Study guide for Marshall

Claude Cahen , "The Birth of Turkey" from his Pre-Ottoman Turkey. Study guide for Cahen

Halil Inalcik , "The Question of the Emergence of the Ottoman State," in International Journal of Turkish Studies, II/1980. Study guide for Inalcik .

Rudi Lindner , "The Tent of Osman, The House of Osman," from his Nomads and Ottomans . Study guide for Lindner .

S. A. M Adshead , "Tamerlane and the Global Arsenal, 1370-1405" from his Central Asia in World History. Study guide for Adshead .

Halil Inalcik , "The Conquest of Edirne (1361)," in Archivum Ottomanicum, III/1971, Study guide for Inalcik .

Peter Sugar , "The Early History and the Establishment of the Ottomans in Europe," from his Southeastern Europe Under Ottoman Rule, 1354-1804. Study guide for Sugar .

Donald Nicol , "Constantine XI and Mehmed II: the Fall of Constantinople 1448-53," from his Last Centuries of Byzantium. Study guide for Nicol

Barnette Miller , "The Curriculum," from her The Palace School of Muhammad the Conqueror . Study guide for Miller .

Halil Inalcik , "The Hub of the City: The Bedestan in Istanbul," International Journal of Turkish Studies, I/1 1979-80. Study guide for Inalcik .

Halil Inalcik , "The Policy of Mehmed II Toward the Greek Population of Istanbul and the Byzantine Buildings of the City," Dumbarton Oaks Papers, vol. 23-25/1969-1970. Study guide for Inalcik .

Halil Inalcik , "The Ottoman Economic Mind and Aspects of the Ottoman Economy," M. A. Cook (ed) Studies in the Economic History of the Middle East. Study guide for Inalcik .

Cornell Fleischer , "Between the Lines: Realities of Scribal Life in the Sixteenth Century," in Colin Heywood and Colin Imber (eds), Studies in Ottoman History in Honour of Professor V. L. Menage. Study guide for Fleischer .

Halil Inalcik , "Sultan Suleyman: The Man and the Statesman," in Gilles Veinstein (ed), Soliman le magnifique et son temps. Study guide for Inalcik .

Alan Fisher , "Suleyman and His Sons," in Gilles Veinstein (ed), Soliman le magnifique et son temps. Study guide for Fisher .

Svat Soucek , "The Ottomans and Their Rivals: Galleys and Galleons, Portolan Charts and Isolarii," from his Piri Reis & Turkish Mapmaking After Columbus: The Khalili Portolan Atlas, Nour Foundation, 1995.

David Morgan , "Shah Isma'il and the Establishment of Shi'ism" from his Medieval Persia: 1040-1797, on the WEB. Study guide for Morgan .

Rhoads Murphey , "Suleyman's Eastern Policy," in Halil Inalcik and Cemal Kafadar (eds), Suleyman the Second and His Time, on the WEB. Study guide for Murphey .

Jean-Louis Bacque-Grammont , "The Eastern Policy of Suleyman the Magnificent 1520-1533," in Halil Inalcik and Cemal Kafadar (eds), Suleyman the Second and His Time, on the WEB. Study guide for Bacque-Grammont .

Said Amir Arjomand , "The Shadow of God on Earth: The Ethos of Persian Patrimonialism," from his The Shadow of God and the Hidden Imam: Religion, Political Order, and Societal Change in Shi'ite Iran from the Beginning to 1890, on the WEB. Study guide for Arjomand .

Leslie Peirce, The Ottoman Harem

Ilber Ortayli , "The Problem of Nationalities in the Ottoman Empire Following the Second Siege of Vienna," in Das Osmanische Reich und Europa 1683 bis 1789. Study guide for Ortayli .

Avigdor Levy , "The Structure of the Jewish Community" in his The Jews of the Ottoman Empire. Study guide for Levy .
Halil Inalcik , "The Ottoman Decline and its Effect Upon the Reaya," in Henrik Birnbaum and Speros Vryonis, Jr. (eds), Aspects of the Balkans: Continuity and Change . Study guide for Inalcik .

Karen Barkey , "The Context of the Seventeenth Century," in her Bandits and Bureaucrats: The Ottoman Route to State Centralization. Study guide for Barkey .

Bernard Lewis , "The Impact of the West," from his The Emergence of Modern Turkey . Study guide for Lewis .
Niyazi Berkes , "Foundations of a Secular State," from his The Development of Secularism in Turkey. Study guide for Berkes .

Ilber Ortayli , "The Greeks and Ottoman Administration During the Tanzimat Period," in Charles Issawi and D. Gondicas (eds), The Greeks in the Ottoman Empire, From the Tanzimat to the Young Turks (in press, not in our library). Study guide for Ortayli .

David Kushner , "Turkish Culture" from his The Rise of Turkish Nationalism, 1876-1908 . Study guide for Kushner.

Albert Hourani , "The Changing Balance of Power in the Eighteenth Century," from his A History of the Arab Peoples. Study guide for Hourani .

Roderic Davison, "The Advent of the Principle of Representation in the Government of the Ottoman Empire," in William R. Polk and Richard L. Chambers (eds), Beginnings of Modernization in the Middle East: The Nineteenth Century. Study guide for Davison .

Max Kortepeter , "American Liberalism Establishes Bases: Robert College and the American University of Beirut," in his The Ottoman Turks: Nomad Kingdom to World Empire.

Selim Deringil , " Long Live the Sultan! Symbolism and Power in the Hamidian Regime," chapter one of his The Well-Protected Domains: Ideology and the Legitimation of Power in the Ottoman Empire 1876-1909, London, 1998.

Aron Rodrigue , "The Alliance and the Emergence of Zionism in Turkey," from his French Jews, Turkish Jews: The Alliance Israelite Universelle and the Politics of Jewish Schooling in Turkey, 1860-1925. Study guide for Rodrigue.

Serif Mardin , "The Young Ottomans," from his The Genesis of Young Ottoman Thought: A Study in the Modernization of Turkish Political Ideas. Study guide for Mardin .

M. Sukru Hanioglu , "The Political Ideas of the Young Turks," from his The Young Turks in Opposition. Study guide for Hanioglu .

Arthur Goldschmidt , Jr., "The Roots of Arab Bitterness," from his A Concise History of the Middle East. Study guide for Goldschmidt .

Hugh Seton-Watson , "The Greeks and the 'Great Idea'," from his Nations and States: An Enquiry into the Origins of Nations and the Politics of Nationalism.

Kemal H. Karpat , "Some Observations on Jewish Immigration, Settlement and Growth of Population in Palestine under Turkish (Ottoman) rule, 1850-1914," in International Journal of Turkish Studies, Spring 2001, VII/1-2.

Ilber Ortayli , "Ottomanism and Zionism During the Second Constitutional Period 1908-1915" in Avigdor Levy (ed), The Jews of the Ottoman Empire. Study guide for Ortayli .

David Fromkin , "The Last Days of Old Europe," in his A Peace to End All Peace: The Fall of the Ottoman Empire and the Creation of the Modern Middle East. Study guide for Fromkin.

[cosmos]

Why is it so hard for you people to understand the difference between the Armenian genocide and the Turks that died during WWI? This is one of the tactics used by your country to deny the genocide.


Are you sure you know your history?

I suppose to be misunderstood is widespread on this forum or I can't tell my opinions clearly. I mention about Ottoman slaughter of Turks that began mostly in the time of Yavuz Sultan Selim in 16th century. A few pure Turk States such as Karamanogullari, Whiteships, Blackships were collapsed by Ottomans and many Turks were slaughtered and many survivors were deported. This is the similar case that Armenians experienced in 1915. Armenian case also is less severe, because it was planned to deport them only, not killing. Their deaths were provided by bad conditions with their fate. Some of them were killed by Ottoman soldiers (mostly by Kurds).

I think it will be congruous to mention about the differences between Jewish and Armenian genocide. You claim that they are similar. As I said above there was no planned annihilation even if it brought about genocide case. For a moment, think of Nazis. They were very determined to kill Jews. Even if they had gone to Antarctica Hitler would decidedly have found and killed them. According to Nazis they deserved to be killed for they are just Jewish. In Armenian case there is no reason like this. They are Armenian or whoever, it is not important, in order to homoginize the State, they had to be deported only. And you showed some pictures as death camps of Armenians. For me it is your comment. Death camps were built by Nazis, Auswitz is an example. I name them killing fabrics so as to kill Jews cheapestly and in shortest time. If there was death camps for Armenians in Anatolia who can hide them for many years.

You just take the 1915 events into consideration so you claim Ottomans applied bad-treatment to Christians but you have to see the all of history in objective evaluation.

[cosmos]

Hovik, I thank you.

Well, it is very important to read impartial sources that you showed but I dont know how many I can read of them. I want to emphasize that whatever book or article I read, I always add my own opinions to them. To accept the knowledges without questioning them is imposible for me. I want to add that when I write my own opinions, sometimes I dont use the certain expression so it may be seemed insecure of me.